Dear PR,<div><br></div><div>I really am looking forward to reading your original post properly and your response here and come back to it. Ideally it would be done over coffee, attended by anyone who might be interested - there would be 3 of us for sure - but if it needs to be typed, typed it will have to be.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I am time-tied right now but coming back to supernatural and its meaning.. I am a massive fan of playing with language, accepting new meaning for words before they even become mainstream, etc, not a "proper" language fascist in the slightest, quite the opposite, I love being informal with it but to decide that something as simple as a prefix (super) is going to mean exactly the opposite of what it means in just one particular case.. To me it is a pretty obvious fallacy. And one used to reject something one cannot even begin to comprehend, hence the need to reject it. Arrogance at its best in my opinion.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Also, I am starting to wonder, this is not so much about rejecting spiritual experiences/realities but about semantics, right? I don't know, but who cares what people mean and/or if it differs in its characterisation? I know my idea of spirituality is very different to that of an orthodox Muslim or Catholic, or even a Hindu or a Buddhist, but if I am having a conversation with one of them and look into their eyes, we both see/feel we believe and respect God/higher force(s), I really feel no need for them to understand God/souls/spirituality as I understand "it". I think the sense of respect for a higher force that rules over us and is nothing but love is the same. I also think it is the same as your scientific acceptance that all is interconnected. The only thing we might differ in is the level of power, control and understanding man (rational mind) has. To decide we are the measure of all things is pretty crazy in my opinion :)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Disclaimer: I have been a terribly arrogant skeptic all of my life up until fairly recently when "exotism" took over my life. I have fought it for the longest time, because I could not accept that I was starting to believe (with all my soul) what I had consistently rejected for so long. (Just to make clear that I have not grown up blindly believing in faith and superstition). I now accept I am not the centre of the universe and feel extremely liberated by it all to be honest.</div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On 12 September 2011 01:34, Poor Richard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:poor_richard@att.net">poor_richard@att.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<u></u>
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
My responses are interlinear...<div class="im"><br>
<br>
On 9/11/2011 2:41 AM, Michel Bauwens wrote:
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
discussion Poor Richard's blogpost:<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Amaia Arcos</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:amaia.arcos@googlemail.com" target="_blank">amaia.arcos@googlemail.com</a>></span><br>
Date: Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 9:00 AM<br>
Subject: Re: is there no p2p spirituality because there is no
spirituality<br>
To: Michel Bauwens <<a href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
I wish I had a printer so that I could see this article on paper and
make notes on the side. From glancing over it:<br>
<br>
<i>I lean towards natural causes, even if those causes turn out to be
very subtle and perhaps very surprising.�</i>(when talking about his
"exotic" experiences) > eingh, spirituality is as natural as nature
itself, not following.</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
My first problem with the term "spirituality" is semantic. I am
interested in <span><span>developing and promoting terminology that
would carry more "invariant meaning across the global communities of
interpretation"</span></span> (a phrase I'm quoting from a FB� post by
Jonny Cache).<br>
<br>
The usage of the term "spirituality" has a long history. Both its
historical and current usage by many implies a connotation of the
supernatural or things outside the natural world. That's one problem I
have with it, based on my skepticism toward mind-body dualism and
natural-supernatural dualism. Amaia's comment above informally
addresses this issue. I, like Amaia perhaps, consider many of the
things implied by the term "spirit" to be part of nature. But others
either imply or may infer a natural-supernatural dichotomy. This makes
the term too ambiguous and "loaded" for me.<br>
<br>
Some use "spirituality" as a broad basket of ideas such as reverence
for all life, the inter-relatedness of all life, altruism, morality,�
conscience, love of others, self-love, selflessness, virtue, etc. All
these ideas have numerous different forms of expression in a variety of
different "communities of interpretation" including current and past
religious traditions as well as academic and secular bodies of
knowledge.<br>
<br>
I think it is fair to say that the terms spirit, spiritual, and
spirituality actually mean something different to each person who uses
them, and one person often means different things at different times.
That is actually much of thier appeal sometimes. Spirituality is a word
you can use in mixed communities of interpretation to refer to high,
noble, or virtuous aspects of human nature in a very generic,
non-sectarian way. I don't object to its deliberately ambiguous use in
that way as a "bridge" between diverse communities of interpretation
when it is used to open common ground-- if further along in the process
we intend to make a transition to less nebulous or ambiguous terms.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
Yes, I am very aware the term "supernatural" exists, which if analysed
means exactly the opposite of how people use it or the dictionary
defines it. Super is a prefix that denotes "a lot of ", according to
the same dictionary it means "specially/particularly" so supernatural,
if anything, means very natural, a lot of natural,
specially/particularly natural. And that is what spirituality is,
precisely. Super-mega-natural.</div>
<div><br>
That "rational" humans decided to go against their own logic rules in
language in order to make sure they were seen as rejecting stuff they
could not begin to comprehend is a complete different story.<br>
<br>
su�per�nat�u�ral<br>
adjective<br>
1.�of,�pertaining�to,�or�being�above�or�beyond�what�is�natural;
unexplainable�by�natural�law�or�phenomena;�abnormal.<br>
2.�of,�pertaining�to,�characteristic�of,�or�attributed�to�God�or�adeity.<br>
3.�of�a�superlative�degree;�preternatural:�a�missile�ofsupernatural�speed.<br>
4.�of,�pertaining�to,�or�attributed�to�ghosts,�goblins,�or�otherunearthly�beings;�eerie;�occult.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Language has not been engineered in a lab. It has evolved organically.
I agree that "supernatural" could logically be defined or taken to mean
the opposite of what it is commonly defined and taken to mean. However,
as commonly used, it is far less ambiguous than spiritual.<br>
<br>
The words nature and natural are not without problems, too. Some
(myself included) often use nature to mean all that exists, while
others exclude man, god(s), ideas, man-made products, etc. from the
realm of nature. It's hard to avoid using "natural" to distinguish
things that are man-made from those that are not, but it has become all
but meaningless on food package labeling. I often use the form
"naturalistic" instead of natural to reduce some of the ambiguity.<br>
<br>
My main point would be that if we are trying to discuss anything in an
even modestly formal or precise way, it is probably incumbent on us to
give a brief definition of what we mean by the word "spirituality" if
we choose to use it. My main objection to the word is that it often
obfuscates meanings rather than conveying them. It is my opinion that
some people use the word "spiritual" because it obfuscates their own
specific beliefs, beliefs that might prove less defensible, even to
themselves,� if expressed more precisely.<br><font color="#888888">
<br>
PR</font><div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
On 9 September 2011 04:06, Michel Bauwens <<a href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://almanac2010.wordpress.com/spiritual-new-supernatural/" target="_blank">http://almanac2010.wordpress.com/spiritual-new-supernatural/</a><br>
><br>
> article via Poor Richard ...<br>
><br>
> Michel<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>�
- <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
><br>
> Connect: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com</a>;
Discuss:�<a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
> Updates: <a href="http://del.icio.us/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://del.icio.us/mbauwens</a>;
<a href="http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
�We would think and live better and be closer to our purpose as humans
if we moved continuously on foot across the surface of the earth� Bruce
Chatwin<br>
</font></div>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>�
- <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br>
<br>
Connect: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com</a>; Discuss:�<a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a>
<div><br>
Updates: <a href="http://del.icio.us/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://del.icio.us/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>�We would think and live better and be closer to our purpose as humans if we moved continuously on foot across the surface of the earth� Bruce Chatwin<br>